From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3801 invoked by alias); 28 Feb 2002 17:44:37 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 3718 invoked from network); 28 Feb 2002 17:44:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nevyn.them.org) (128.2.145.6) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 28 Feb 2002 17:44:29 -0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 16gUbU-0002q4-00; Thu, 28 Feb 2002 12:44:28 -0500 Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2002 09:44:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Andrew Cagney Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [rfa] Always define all of TARGET_SIGNAL_* Message-ID: <20020228124428.B10331@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Andrew Cagney , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <20020227221148.A30753@nevyn.them.org> <3C7E456C.6090605@cygnus.com> <20020228115139.A8496@nevyn.them.org> <3C7E6634.4010209@cygnus.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3C7E6634.4010209@cygnus.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.23i X-SW-Source: 2002-02/txt/msg00748.txt.bz2 On Thu, Feb 28, 2002 at 12:17:40PM -0500, Andrew Cagney wrote: > >On Thu, Feb 28, 2002 at 09:57:48AM -0500, Andrew Cagney wrote: > > > >>>I've been meaning to fix this since I noticed it last summer. These > >>>numbers > >>>are part of the remote protocol. While I think the last ones are never > >>>sent > >>>over the wire, they could be (with the exception of TARGET_SIGNAL_LAST > >>>which > >>>is -not- part of the protocol, as I understand it). Having them jump > >>>around > >>>is bad. > > > >> > >>Wasn't this enum going to be moved to signals.h? > > > > > >I think so, but I didn't see any pressing reason to. If you want, I > >can do that. > > > >OK otherwise? > > I'd leave it until after things branch and then fix it properly in the > trunk. I don't really see a point in fixing this nit in the remote protocol next release rather than this one, but if you prefer I'll wait. -- Daniel Jacobowitz Carnegie Mellon University MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer